Hanukkah 2004: No More Compromises

There can be no compromise with the Palestinians until they rid
themselves of the corruption and oppression represented by the era of
Arafat and the “government” he left behind. The Israelis learned this
the hard way. Now the rest of the world is being instructed in the demands
of militant Islam that has no hesitancy to kill hundreds and thousands of
innocent people to achieve its goals.

In his book, “The Case for Democracy”, Natan Sharansky, a leading
member of the Israeli government and former prisoner of the
Soviet Union
, points out that, “The PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization) was
formed in 1964. This was three years before the Six Day War, during
which
Israel
captured the West Bank from
Jordan
and the Gaza Strip from
Egypt
. Obviously, then, the reason for the establishment of the PLO was not to
‘liberate’ these territories from Israeli rule. Rather, it was to
destroy the state of
Israel
and, as its leader frequently boasted, ‘push all the Jews into the
sea.’”

There it is in a nutshell. There were no “Palestinians” when
Israel
became a nation in 1948. There were Arabs who lived within the borders of
the new nation and they were offered citizenship. Instead, they were urged
by nations opposed to
Israel
to flee in expectation of returning after
Israel
was invaded. Those nations, however, were defeated and those that fled
became refugees. They have remained refugees ever since, pawns in the
hands of Arab nations that have refused to permit them to become citizens
to this day!

Everything that Yasser Arafat did since the founding of the PLO was
directed at the destruction of
Israel
’s Jews. Despite ample evidence of this, the world insisted on treating
him as a great statesman. He was even awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. And,
following the Oslo Accords, he instituted the “intifada” that wreaked
death on Israelis.

Several Israeli governments, led by Yitzak Rabin, Benjamin Netanyahu, and
Ehud Barak tried to negotiate their way to some form of peace with Arafat,
often offering vast tracts of land in exchange for a promise to desist
from terrorism. They learned slowly and painfully they could not expect
anything but more terrorism.

A petition being circulated by the US Committee for a Free Lebanon is
seeking signatures to an “Open Letter to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon”
calling on him not to make the same mistake with
Syria
. “If
Syria
is serious about peace, it should start making peace at home first. It
should pull out of
Lebanon
immediately. The Syrian society today is full of hate and anger. Hate
against Jews and anger against the
United States
.” Like Sharansky, the letter says, “Moral clarity dictates that
Israel
helps free Syrians so that both people can decide what future they want as
neighbors. Peace with a dictatorship can only perpetuate the misery of
oppression felt by 22 million Syrians and Lebanese.”

For a very long time the Israeli people were sharply divided about how to
achieve peace with the people that are now called Palestinians. Half
longed for peace on any basis.Half
saw the threat for what it was. The Israelis suffered from a moral muddle.
The PLO was not about the welfare of the Palestinians. The PLO was not
about building schools, hospitals, tending to the infrastructure,
encouraging businesses, and most certainly not about freedom for those in
its control.

As Sharansky points out, “For the PLO, however, terrorism was a calling
card. They murdered Olympic athletes, executed kindergarten
schoolchildren, hijacked airliners, set off bombs in public places, and
committed a host of other acts of terror.” Thus, moral clarity demands
that one recognize that “There is no moral equivalence between
Palestinian terror attacks and Israeli counter-terror operations.”

It is this lack of moral clarity that has clouded much of the
US
government’s effort to mediate in order to secure peace from the
Palestinians. It is only the fence the Israelis ultimately decided to
build that has dramatically thwarted the killings inflicted on their
people. Do Palestinians suffer as a result? Yes. Do they need to reject
the authority of those who have brought about this suffering? Yes. Can
they, given the opportunity, embrace peace? Democracy? Yes.

Arafat and the PLO have had plenty of time to indoctrinate the
Palestinians with a cult of hatred for the Jews of Israel. It is a hatred
that is widespread throughout the
Middle East
and it is a hatred shared by many in the West. Simply stated, the demand
that
Israel
cease to exist is anti-Semitism. The demand that they not respond, i.e.,
protect themselves against those seeking to kill them is anti-Semitism. To
suggest that the three thousand year old history of Jews in
Israel
has no merit in their right to a nation of their own is anti-Semitism.

It is
US
policy as articulated by President Bush that Palestinians must “elect
new leaders, leaders not compromised by terror.” Perhaps he was prompted
to this from the image of Palestinians dancing in the streets, celebrating
9-11? His demand is for a
Palestine
based on an “entirely new political and economic institutions based on
democracy, market economics and action against terrorism” and a
constitution that establishes a “system of reliable justice to punish
those who prey on the innocent.”

Now the question is whether the new Secretary of State, Dr. Condoleezza
Rice, will pursue this goal. Neither
Israel
, nor the
US
can negotiate peace until the Palestinian leadership demonstrates they can
adopt democracy and protect the universal rights of their citizens.
Signing agreements or treaties with terrorists is a total waste of time.

Alan Caruba writes a weekly column, “Warning Signs” posted on the
Internet site of The National Anxiety Center at www.anxietycenter.com.